Demand for Apple's new iPad remains strong, but production of the device has reportedly been limited by supply of Retina displays, as well as a new focus on employees at Foxconn that has resulted in worker hours being cut.

Analyst Shaw Wu with Sterne Agee aimed to quash some investor concern on Wednesday that demand for the new iPad is waning. That's not true, he said, as his checks within Apple's supply chain have found that the company continues to have strong interest in its latest touchscreen tablet.

Instead, he said, it's supply of the new high-resolution Retina display that has limited shipments of the latest iPad. He expects that situation to improve over the coming quarters, as additional production lines and suppliers are added.

Samsung is currently believed to be the primary supplier of Retina displays for the new iPad. Both LG and Sharp were said to have initially struggled in making the high-resolution screens for Apple, but recently began small-volume shipments.

Another factor in iPad supply, Wu said, has been the fact that Foxconn is now "conforming to more sound labor practices." Last month, following an independent audit by the Fair Labor Association, Apple's manufacturing partner Foxconn agreed to fix a number of violations that were discovered, including excess working times by its factory employees.

"This is in an effort to improve working conditions," Wu said. "From our understanding, the irony is that many employees prefer to work more overtime."

Some Foxconn workers publicly questioned last month why their hours were being cut after the review conducted by the FLA. Foxconn reduced employee working hours to 49 per week, including overtime, but the change will also result in smaller paychecks for workers.

Because iPad production has apparently been slowed by factors other than demand, Wu has opted to raise his estimates for sales in the current quarter. He now sees Apple having sold 12.3 million iPads in the already-concluded March quarter, up from his previous forecast of 11.5 million.

Wu also sees Apple selling a total of 63 million iPads in calendar 2012, up from an earlier prediction of 60 million. He has also raised Sterne Agee's price target for AAPL stock to $750, up from $740.

Some Foxconn workers last month why their hours were being cut after the review conducted by the FLA. Foxconn reduced employee working hours to 49 per week, including overtime, but the change will also result in smaller paychecks for workers.

Gee -where were the ivory tower investigators when I worked in a shipyard in Louisiana that required a minimum of 54 hours/week?

Oh, that's right. Who would expect paper whiners to get their hands dirty by getting near someplace where folks are actually working for a living? If they showed up inside a factory - it wasn't for a summer job; but, maybe a summer internship.

This might be more interesting if the 'prediction' were coming from someone who had a history of getting things right. As it is, Wu has one of the worst records of any of the analysts who follow Apple.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

This might be more interesting if the 'prediction' were coming from someone who had a history of getting things right. As it is, Wu has one of the worst records of any of the analysts who follow Apple.

I'm sure some employees may be concerned about what will happen at some point in the future, and I've seen some articles about that, but where did FoxConn say the policy would be changed immediately and hours are already cut?

The articles posted on it, even here at AI, say that FoxConn plans to put corrective policies in place by July of 2013, more than a year away.

Gee -where were the ivory tower investigators when I worked in a shipyard in Louisiana that required a minimum of 54 hours/week?

Oh, that's right. Who would expect paper whiners to get their hands dirty by getting near someplace where folks are actually working for a living? If they showed up inside a factory - it wasn't for a summer job; but, maybe a summer internship.

I hear you. I've worked in similar or worse conditions than what people are crying over with the Foxconn workers.

...
Another factor in iPad supply, Wu said, has been the fact that Foxconn is now "conforming to more sound labor practices." Last month, following an independent audit by the Fair Labor Association, Apple's manufacturing partner Foxconn agreed to fix a number of violations that were discovered, including excess working times by its factory employees.

"This is in an effort to improve working conditions," Wu said. "From our understanding, the irony is that many employees prefer to work more overtime."
...

I don't see why they don't just hire more people. They could give each new employee a biscuit and a cup of tea, guide them to a workstation and within half an hour have them start a 12-hour shift fitting glass screens into beveled frames. /s

This might be more interesting if the 'prediction' were coming from someone who had a history of getting things right. As it is, Wu has one of the worst records of any of the analysts who follow Apple.

I know you don't care for Analysts in general, but is this guy particularly bad? Can you tag some of his terrible "predictions"?

Considering that the shipping times are back up to 1-2 weeks, and there is limited store availability (e.g here in NYC the Upper West Side store had the 32GB Verizon model in stock but none of the other stores do), I'd tend to agree that it is more likely an issue of supply than demand. Apple cranked up production to ensure a smooth rollout, but perhaps after that initial supply sold out demand caught up with supply again.

Anything that puts China on the same footing as the US in terms of workplace regulation, living wages, safety, etc., is a good thing as it reduces the incentive to offshore manufacturing. I'd put the productivity of a US worker up against any other country in the world, except that they are willing to turn their environment into a cesspool and work their workers to death to make quotas and therefore they're cheaper. Put us on the same playing field and the jobs will come back to America.

When I was younger I worked in a call centre in Scotland. I did 2x 108 hour (yes, thats one hundred and eight) weeks back to back and when I handed in my time sheets they went ballistic. I felt fine but was limited to a maximum of 80 hours after that.

If you are fit and healthy and not killing yourself then why cant you work as much as you are physically fit to do?

These crybabies are just a bunch of communists who want to reduce unemployment by reducing hours and increasing job spaces.

No. He's agains moronic policies generated by a bunch of ignorant and arrogant Americans. Are you even aware that there are NO LEGAL RESTRICTIONS on hours worked in the US? And NO restrictions on MANDATORY overtime in the US? What a bunch of hypocrites we are. The overwhelming majority of Americans have absolutely no clue what work conditions are like at Foxconn, what the social and economic needs are of Chinese workers, or even what a factory job is like in the US. I've worked in an auto plant and a steel mill - while I was at the auto plant for several months we had MANDATORY 7 day work weeks with 10 hour days! And my job at the steel mills was working on top of the ovens, a far worse and more dangerous job than what these workers are experiencing - and I would even work double shifts at the mills (16 hours straight) to make extra money. Shame on these Chinese workers for wanting to work overtime! But oh yeah, we know what's best for them don't we... To hell with their need to make extra money to support their mostly poor rural families back home, and for trying to improve their lives at factories that already pay ABOVE prevailing wages.

What? I thought Apple can pick and choose any supplier for their retina display. After all, Samsung is like Foxconn that leverages unskilled workers to assemble displays *created* & *engineered* by Apple, though their manufactring process is somewhat more automated.

If you live in an industrialized democracy you enjoy protections hard won by people like those you demonize. No amount of baseless personal attacks on me will change those facts.

But why all the rage? Apple made clear they support worker protections. I don't see anyone screaming to give up their own protections. Why does it anger you so much that someone else may gain what you already have?

But why all the rage? Apple made clear they support worker protections. I don't see anyone screaming to give up their own protections. Why does it anger you so much that someone else may gain what you already have?

What proportion of your paycheck do you send to Foxconn workers?

If it's zero -- I am going to go out on a limb, and guess it is -- I humbly submit that you're a hypocrite.

Nice! Shows that those elitists claiming to care about the poor and disenfranchised have no clue and don't even ask those who they are supposed to be protecting what is actually good for them.

That's why top-down socialism never works. Those elites in the top starve the bottom 99.99% in the name of fairness and equality. That's precisely what happened to Mao's China almost three generations ago.

Anything that puts China on the same footing as the US in terms of workplace regulation, living wages, safety, etc., is a good thing as it reduces the incentive to offshore manufacturing. I'd put the productivity of a US worker up against any other country in the world, except that they are willing to turn their environment into a cesspool and work their workers to death to make quotas and therefore they're cheaper. Put us on the same playing field and the jobs will come back to America.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JollyPaul

If you live in an industrialized democracy you enjoy protections hard won by people like those you demonize. No amount of baseless personal attacks on me will change those facts.

But why all the rage? Apple made clear they support worker protections. I don't see anyone screaming to give up their own protections. Why does it anger you so much that someone else may gain what you already have?

Amen!

Quote:

Originally Posted by anantksundaram

What proportion of your paycheck do you send to Foxconn workers?

If it's zero -- I am going to go out on a limb, and guess it is -- I humbly submit that you're a hypocrite.

This might be more interesting if the 'prediction' were coming from someone who had a history of getting things right. As it is, Wu has one of the worst records of any of the analysts who follow Apple.

You do have to wonder what photographs he has to maintain his standing as an analyst.

Sarcasm as a position is a bore. Wake me when you have a real argument.

What you suggested in your previous post would not be instrumental in creating an uncontroversial solution, because it would be too easy for the employers to obtain said signatures. Your suggestion was naive. That's my argument.

Anything that puts China on the same footing as the US in terms of workplace regulation, living wages, safety, etc., is a good thing as it reduces the incentive to offshore manufacturing. I'd put the productivity of a US worker up against any other country in the world, except that they are willing to turn their environment into a cesspool and work their workers to death to make quotas and therefore they're cheaper. Put us on the same playing field and the jobs will come back to America.

I have heard that while labor costs re cheaper in third world hellholes, other costs, such as energy, are higher than they are here in the US. I have heard that companies are bringing back production to the US due to overall favorable economics.

if true, the problem may fix itself. What if it became true that the US was the very best place to manufacture, despite the need to pay workers a somewhat larger amount?

What other factors would need to be in place? Keep in mind that labor economics, while important, are only one piece of the puzzle.

Nothing against their gaining rights (if, indeed, that's what it is). In fact, I think it's wonderful, if all else could be equal

But if this implies -- as this article indicates -- reduced supply, which, in turn, leads to higher prices, falling sales, workers being laid off and production being moved elsewhere, what would you propose?

What you suggested in your previous post would not be instrumental in creating an uncontroversial solution, because it would be too easy for the employers to obtain said signatures. Your suggestion was naive. That's my argument.

And there it is. I agree - the people who mindlessly cry workers' rights abuse would definitely claim that signatures were obtained at gunpoint (or similar). So take it one step further and have a 3rd party which, verifiably, has no economic interest either way collect the voluntary signatures. And make it so that workers can retract the clause at any time.

This allows for a good mix of workers who prefer to work themselves to the bone for whatever reason, and workers who prefer a work/life balance for whatever reason. Plus allows people to change their minds as their life situation changes. Throw in a 2-4 week changeover wait time for the person who has to do the work scheduling, and I think you'd have a system which works for everyone.

Nothing against their gaining rights (if, indeed, that's what it is). In fact, I think it's wonderful, if all else could be equal

But if this implies -- as this article indicates -- reduced supply, which, in turn, leads to higher prices, falling sales, workers being laid off and production being moved elsewhere, what would you propose?

You would be naive to suggest that there isn't a trade-off here.

I would propose hiring more people to work shorter shifts -- it has been indicated previously that there is no shortage of labor. There won't be any reduction in supply, problem solved.

But if this implies -- as this article indicates -- reduced supply, which, in turn, leads to higher prices, falling sales, workers being laid off and production being moved elsewhere, what would you propose?

You would be naive to suggest that there isn't a trade-off here.

If there is reduced supply due to labor shortages, how will reduced supply lead to workers being laid off?